Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-g7gxr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-19T09:12:27.197Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Psychological Effects of Stereotaxic Operations for the Relief of Parkinsonian Symptoms

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  08 February 2018

John McFie
John McFie*
Affiliation:
The National Hospital, Queen Square, London, W.C.I.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

In view of their many inter-connections with the cortical grey matter, the effects of lesions in the basal cerebral nuclei are of the greatest theoretical interest. On account of the rarity of naturally occurring lesions confined to these nuclei, there have been few reports of psychological changes in patients with discrete subcortical lesions. Smyth and Stern (1938) described four cases of intrinsic tumour of the thalamus, all of whom gave evidence of organic dementia early in the course of the disease. Eaton et al. (1939) reported six cases of symmetrical cerebral calcification preponderating in the basal ganglia, with no radiographic evidence of cerebral atrophy, of which the clinical concomitants included mental retardation. Alford (1948) has gone so far as to insist that destruction of thalamic nuclei is alone responsible for intellectual impairment, and that “focal” defects associated with different cortical lesions are related either to sensory disturbances or to the psychiatric state of the patient.

Type
Original Articles
Information
Journal of Mental Science , Volume 106 , Issue 445 , October 1960 , pp. 1512 - 1517
Copyright
Copyright © Royal College of Psychiatrists, 1960 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Alford, L. B., Nerv. Ment. Dis. Monog., 1948, No. 77.Google Scholar
Anderson, A. L., J. Clin. Psychol., 1951, 7, 149.Google Scholar
Eaton, L. McK., Camp, J. D., and Love, J. G., Arch. Neurol. Psychiat., 1939, 41, 921.Google Scholar
Lashley, K. S., J. Comp. Neurol., 1944, 80, 257.Google Scholar
McCaul, I. R., J. Neurol. Neurosurg. Psychiat., 1959, 22, 109.Google Scholar
McFie, J., J. Nerv. Ment. Dis., 1960 (in press).Google Scholar
Idem and Piercy, M. F., Brain, 1952, 75, 292.Google Scholar
Smyth, G. E., and Stern, K., ibid., 1938, 61, 339.Google Scholar
Riklan, M., Diller, L., Weiner, H., and Cooper, I. S., Arch. gen. Psychiat., 1960, 2, 22.Google Scholar
Rosvold, H. E., Mishkin, M., and Szwarcbart, M. K., J. comp. Physiol. Psychol., 1958, 51, 437 (58).Google Scholar
Terman, L. M., and Merrill, M. A., Measuring Intelligence, 1937. London: Harrap.Google Scholar
Wechsler, D., The Measurement of Adult Intelligence, 1944. Baltimore: Williams ' Wilkins.Google Scholar
Zangwill, O. L., Proc. Roy. Soc. Med., 1943, 36, 576.Google Scholar
Submit a response

eLetters

No eLetters have been published for this article.